Mr. Clayton, the way you structure your lectures by illustrating every piece of theory with an example is a jewell in the land of education. I love it! The only negative point I can come up with is that you don't speak Dutch. Many greetings from the Netherlands.
I participated in a solid mechanics course when I was an undergraduate student in 2014. Actually, the first and second lectures remind me of ten years ago at school. I have been working as a CFD engineer since 2019 in the industry, but I am also trying to learn FEM because there are not as many job opportunities for CFD professionals. These lectures are actually ingenious and very helpful in expanding my career path. Thanks a lot.
This Clayton guy is pretty good, i gotta say. His trademark "hehehe'" 11:28 got me addicted to his videos. On a separate note, also great didactis. Subscribed
Thank you so much for the class. Couldn't thank you enough, Sir. I want to address an issue. Why is the coordinate rotation matrix different than others? I mean, column 1, 2, 3 are supposed to be where i hat, j hat and k hat lands right? or in this case e1, e2, e3. Since our tensors are symmetrical in nature, we can transpose it for simplification, which we did for elongations, and even strains. However, for rotation matrix, it is still in dot product convention. I thought, you kept it in dot product convention as it was only for demonstration in Q as how rotation matrix looks like for asymmetric tensors. However, you used it in terms of linear transformation at 1:11:37. So I'm confused. Especially when answer came out to be 45. My question being, how does rotational matrix in dot product convention when used as linear transformation work? Please help me to understand better. Thank you again.
Two times ε is basically the engineering shear strain (γ) . The engineering shear strain γ makes the equation τ = Gγ work; i.e., the ratio between the shear stress and engineering shear strain is the shear modulus, which is convenient.
1:57:04 Hello, dear professor In slide displacement function, why is y not a function of x2? I see that when we move in the direction of x2, the value of y changes
Shouldn't it be (h/4) instead of (h/2) for the argument in the second set of parentheses at the 2:34:16 mark? Also, nice work...I'm loving these videos!
i dont understand 1:49:46, taking the limit of an expression as a variable approaches 0 is pretty standard but I figure the point of the infinitesmal dX is that its infinitesmal, so the proximity to 0 should not change the equation.
Hello I have done the finite element analysis of the Cassette used in roller blinds. How can I prove my FEA by Bench Mark Calculation. Which formula, I need to use. If any one Know , Guys help me. I look forward your response. Thanks
At 43:20, how do we know which direction does each sigma_{i, j} point? For sigma_11, it points negative-e1. sigma_12 points positive-e2, sigma_13 points negative-e3. For sigma_31, it goes negative-e1. sigma_32 goes negative-e2, sigma_33 goes negative-e3. What is the rule here? Please help.
There is mistake in the direction of S12. Everything should be going in the negative ei direction. Thank you for pointing this out as I have yet to catch it!
The tetrahedron is formed by slicing a parallelepiped along an arbitrary plane. So, the force acting on the cutting plane is the reaction exerted by the other half of the parallelepiped and has an opposite sign. So basically, on all the faces besides the cutting plane, the stress vector would be the opposite sign. That is the only rule. And yes sigma12 would be in the negative direction.
Dear Pettit : Congratulations for your post, and Channel, I ve learn a lot. Woulld it be possible to post the presentation pdf file and the Mathematica file so we can follow through in our adventure inti FEM. Thanks
Thank you very much for yours videos ! I come form france and it's help me very much ! I would to ask you a question : why the shear force before dx1 is not in the same sense that after dx1 because q is the same along the cube no ? Also i think it's maybe q that i don't understand 😅 if it's a stress or not... actually i have 17 years old and i do a master degree (i'am in advance). Once thanks you, i hope that you understand what i want say because my english is not very well 😅
There is a minor error in the equation for von Mises stress: I2(s) is equal to 0.5{[I1(s)]^2 - I1(SS)} it doesn't affect the final result since I1(S) is zero
Hello, thank you for your series. I've started learning with this course and it looks good if you post pdf of each lecture. How can we get it (pdf) ? Thank you so much.
Mr. Clayton, the way you structure your lectures by illustrating every piece of theory with an example is a jewell in the land of education. I love it! The only negative point I can come up with is that you don't speak Dutch. Many greetings from the Netherlands.
oh I feel like we came here from same place for same reasons considering that you're from Netherlands xD
Indeed, this dude is a gem
I participated in a solid mechanics course when I was an undergraduate student in 2014. Actually, the first and second lectures remind me of ten years ago at school. I have been working as a CFD engineer since 2019 in the industry, but I am also trying to learn FEM because there are not as many job opportunities for CFD professionals. These lectures are actually ingenious and very helpful in expanding my career path. Thanks a lot.
Hi, I will be pursuing a master's course with having specialization in CFD. If possible can we have a discussion about that somewhere else?
Dear Dr. Clayton, thank you very much for the lecture. Greetings from South Korea
You have made a new channel Mr Clayton. I literally panicked, when I couldn't find your videos in your other channel.
best lecture for finite elements. thank you!
The lectures are so great! Thanks for sharing🙏🏻
This Clayton guy is pretty good, i gotta say. His trademark "hehehe'" 11:28 got me addicted to his videos. On a separate note, also great didactis. Subscribed
Nice and easy :) Thank you very much Clayton
those lectures are briliant. nice and keep simple. it helps a lot for unterstanding . thanks a lot for sharring those videos.
Thank you so much for the class. Couldn't thank you enough, Sir. I want to address an issue. Why is the coordinate rotation matrix different than others? I mean, column 1, 2, 3 are supposed to be where i hat, j hat and k hat lands right? or in this case e1, e2, e3. Since our tensors are symmetrical in nature, we can transpose it for simplification, which we did for elongations, and even strains. However, for rotation matrix, it is still in dot product convention. I thought, you kept it in dot product convention as it was only for demonstration in Q as how rotation matrix looks like for asymmetric tensors. However, you used it in terms of linear transformation at 1:11:37. So I'm confused. Especially when answer came out to be 45. My question being, how does rotational matrix in dot product convention when used as linear transformation work? Please help me to understand better. Thank you again.
Hi Mr. Clayton, in 1:18:15, why there is a number of 2 in front of the strain component from epsilon12 to epsilon32?
Two times ε is basically the engineering shear strain (γ) . The engineering shear strain γ makes the equation τ = Gγ work; i.e., the ratio between the shear stress and engineering shear strain is the shear modulus, which is convenient.
1:57:04 Hello, dear professor
In slide displacement function, why is y not a function of x2?
I see that when we move in the direction of x2, the value of y changes
sir could u please tell us where we can download the slides of these lectures.
Hi. The solver is Mathematica?
2:26:06
It has to be ... *((h/4)+(X2*2). 🙏🙏
Hello,
at 1:34:00 how should we calculate G12/G13/G23?
Shouldn't it be (h/4) instead of (h/2) for the argument in the second set of parentheses at the 2:34:16 mark? Also, nice work...I'm loving these videos!
i dont understand 1:49:46, taking the limit of an expression as a variable approaches 0 is pretty standard but I figure the point of the infinitesmal dX is that its infinitesmal, so the proximity to 0 should not change the equation.
Brilliant teaching….thank you
Hello
I have done the finite element analysis of the Cassette used in roller blinds. How can I prove my FEA by Bench Mark Calculation. Which formula, I need to use.
If any one Know , Guys help me. I look forward your response.
Thanks
At 43:20, how do we know which direction does each sigma_{i, j} point?
For sigma_11, it points negative-e1. sigma_12 points positive-e2, sigma_13 points negative-e3.
For sigma_31, it goes negative-e1. sigma_32 goes negative-e2, sigma_33 goes negative-e3.
What is the rule here? Please help.
There is mistake in the direction of S12. Everything should be going in the negative ei direction. Thank you for pointing this out as I have yet to catch it!
The tetrahedron is formed by slicing a parallelepiped along an arbitrary plane. So, the force acting on the cutting plane is the reaction exerted by the other half of the parallelepiped and has an opposite sign. So basically, on all the faces besides the cutting plane, the stress vector would be the opposite sign. That is the only rule. And yes sigma12 would be in the negative direction.
@@jagjitbajwa68 Oh my gosh. It's been so long that I forgot I did comment here. Thank you for your answer!
Thanks Dr. Clayton!
Dear Pettit : Congratulations for your post, and Channel, I ve learn a lot. Woulld it be possible to post the presentation pdf file and the Mathematica file so we can follow through in our adventure inti FEM. Thanks
holy jesus greatful to Dr.Clayton，you save me！
Dear Dr.Clayton , are there eclass resource available for me non-local student ?
At 1:07:10, is the I_1(S) missing the squared? I mean, I_2(S) = 0.5 * [I_1(S)^2 * I_1(S * S)], right?
You are correct :)
Where can I get the pdf notes please
Good day sir, would is it possible to post the example and the solutions? This would be great help in order to check my solution.
Great one! thanks.
Thank you very much for yours videos ! I come form france and it's help me very much ! I would to ask you a question : why the shear force before dx1 is not in the same sense that after dx1 because q is the same along the cube no ? Also i think it's maybe q that i don't understand 😅 if it's a stress or not... actually i have 17 years old and i do a master degree (i'am in advance). Once thanks you, i hope that you understand what i want say because my english is not very well 😅
There is a minor error in the equation for von Mises stress: I2(s) is equal to 0.5{[I1(s)]^2 - I1(SS)} it doesn't affect the final result since I1(S) is zero
Show de bola!
Woow it's good, thanks
Hello, thank you for your series. I've started learning with this course and it looks good if you post pdf of each lecture. How can we get it (pdf) ? Thank you so much.
can i have the ppt file for my study ?
I think who said "velocity" were in the wrong class.🤣🤣🤣
18:51